BACKGROUND: Since introduction of Contemporary Epstein criteria, it has been studied and validated in many countries and nations. However, they were not validated in Middle East patients up till now. AIM OF THE WORK: To validate the Contemporary Epstein criteria in Middle East patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: On past 8 years, 70 cases underwent radical prostatectomy for T1c prostate cancer. Contemporary Epstein criteria were applied retrospectively on prostatic biopsies. Among our patients, 35 cases met the criteria for clinically insignificant prostate cancer. Pathological revision of the prostatic biopsies, definitive prostatectomy specimens and re-staging were done by single pathologist. Assessment of recurrence rate was done. Up and down grading of the Gleason scoring was studied. RESULTS: The preoperative data and biopsy results using the Contemporary Epstein criteria were fulfilled on 35 cases. On definitive pathology; 16 cases (45.7%) had Gleason score >6, while 8.6% of cases are non-organ confined (2 cases and 1 case with extra- capsular and Seminal vesicles infiltrations, respectively). Both lobes were involved in 20 cases. Moreover, 40% (14 cases) showed upgrading of the score. Lymphatic permeation could be recognized in four cases. Mean follow-up time 88.1 months, 8.6% cases develop metastasis. CONCLUSION: Whenever Epstein criteria are applied in Middle East patients, the decision of active surveillance based for clinically insignificant prostate cancer (who met the Epstein criteria) will miss nearly 46% of unfavorable prostate cancer. As well as a risk of later metastasis could be in 8.6% of them.
BACKGROUND: Since introduction of Contemporary Epstein criteria, it has been studied and validated in many countries and nations. However, they were not validated in Middle East patients up till now. AIM OF THE WORK: To validate the Contemporary Epstein criteria in Middle East patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: On past 8 years, 70 cases underwent radical prostatectomy for T1c prostate cancer. Contemporary Epstein criteria were applied retrospectively on prostatic biopsies. Among our patients, 35 cases met the criteria for clinically insignificant prostate cancer. Pathological revision of the prostatic biopsies, definitive prostatectomy specimens and re-staging were done by single pathologist. Assessment of recurrence rate was done. Up and down grading of the Gleason scoring was studied. RESULTS: The preoperative data and biopsy results using the Contemporary Epstein criteria were fulfilled on 35 cases. On definitive pathology; 16 cases (45.7%) had Gleason score >6, while 8.6% of cases are non-organ confined (2 cases and 1 case with extra- capsular and Seminal vesicles infiltrations, respectively). Both lobes were involved in 20 cases. Moreover, 40% (14 cases) showed upgrading of the score. Lymphatic permeation could be recognized in four cases. Mean follow-up time 88.1 months, 8.6% cases develop metastasis. CONCLUSION: Whenever Epstein criteria are applied in Middle East patients, the decision of active surveillance based for clinically insignificant prostate cancer (who met the Epstein criteria) will miss nearly 46% of unfavorable prostate cancer. As well as a risk of later metastasis could be in 8.6% of them.
Authors: Felix K-H Chun; Thomas Steuber; Andreas Erbersdobler; Eike Currlin; Jochen Walz; Thorsten Schlomm; Alexander Haese; Hans Heinzer; Michael McCormack; Hartwig Huland; Markus Graefen; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2005-12-22 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Felix K-H Chun; Alberto Briganti; Shahrokh F Shariat; Markus Graefen; Francesco Montorsi; Andreas Erbersdobler; Thomas Steuber; Andrea Salonia; Eike Currlin; Vincenzo Scattoni; Martin G Friedrich; Thorsten Schlomm; Alexander Haese; Uwe Michl; Renzo Colombo; Hans Heinzer; Luc Valiquette; Patrizio Rigatti; Claus G Roehrborn; Hartwig Huland; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: BJU Int Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Alberto Briganti; Shahrokh F Shariat; Felix K-H Chun; Georg C Hutterer; Claus G Roehrborn; Andrea Gallina; Patrizio Rigatti; Luc Valiquette; Francesco Montorsi; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: BJU Int Date: 2007-06-15 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Robert W Veltri; M Craig Miller; Leslie A Mangold; Gerard J O'Dowd; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin Journal: J Urol Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Claudio Jeldres; Nazareno Suardi; Jochen Walz; Georg C Hutterer; Sascha Ahyai; Jean-Baptiste Lattouf; Alexander Haese; Markus Graefen; Andreas Erbersdobler; Hans Heinzer; Hartwig Huland; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2007-12-07 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Nathan Lawrentschuk; Gina Lockwood; Peter Davies; Andy Evans; Joan Sweet; Ants Toi; Neil E Fleshner Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2010-05-13 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Baris Turkbey; Haresh Mani; Omer Aras; Jennifer Ho; Anthony Hoang; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Harsh Agarwal; Vijay Shah; Marcelino Bernardo; Yuxi Pang; Dagane Daar; Yolanda L McKinney; W Marston Linehan; Aradhana Kaushal; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-03-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ralph El Sebaaly; Mazen Mansour; Muhieddine Labban; Rola F Jaafar; Alexandre Armache; Deborah Mukherji; Albert El Hajj Journal: Prostate Int Date: 2019-11-30